Nobody 2.

Review #2411: Nobody 2.

Cast: 

Bob Odenkirk (Hutch Mansell), Connie Nielsen (Becca Mansell), John Ortiz (Wyatt Martin), Colin Hanks (Abel), RZA (Harry Mansell), Christopher Lloyd (David Mansell), Sharon Stone (Lendina), Colin Salmon (The Barber), Gage Munroe (Brady Mansell), Paisley Cadorath (Sammy Mansell), Daniel Bernhardt (Kartoush), and Lucius Hoyos (Max Martin) Directed by Timo Tjahjanto.

Review: 

You might remember that Nobody (2021) was a bit of a delight in what one could call an "addiction drama about a man whose addiction is violence." Derek Kolstad wrote the script for that movie, and it probably is a good omen that he returns to write the script (having sole credit for the story and co-writing the screenplay with Aaron Rabin). Sure, maybe the punchline at the end of the day was that an action hero was being inhabited by Bob Odenkirk, but it was a pretty neat movie in both showing someone who did look the part for an action movie and had fun with it (and, apparently, the training regimen done for that movie probably saved his life when he had a heart issue in 2021). The movie is directed by Timo Tjahjanto, a West German-born Indonesian filmmaker making his American debut after five movies made in his native Indonesia. For the most part, a good deal of the cast from the first film reprise their roles for this film.

The movie might be on vacation a bit, but at least it does have some entertainment value for the most basic of requirements. On the average scale of action movies, it probably would be in the middle between the 2025 slate of Novocaine and Ballerina, and it certainly wouldn't top the first Nobody, but being an average sequel is not a bad thing. Instead of trying to cope with the idea of just being a dull family man, we now have a guy who just kicks ass and thinks he can simply just ride that wave for a while that really can't just have a break. I guess one's nature makes things inevitable for someone who just allows things to get nuts. Do I expect more from certain action movies? Eh....not really. In fact, sometimes an action movie beat could resemble the horror movie in where I play generous because God only knows what would happen if either genre was at the mercy of streaming.* Odenkirk is still pretty game to carry the proceedings with worthwhile believability that can look and sound the part of an asskicker (to an extent) while having the troubles that come with someone who just can't resist scratching the proverbial itch. Nielsen is relatively fine in the same way that one is accepting of a dark cloud gathering because they are clearly ready with an umbrella in hand, I suppose. Stone is actually pretty neat as the routine villain, minus the fact that one could do with most (all?) of the lines stating how scary she is meant to be (ooh, she'll kill your bloodline if you cross her, what's next, she'll clone you to kill you again?), because she just has that basic instinctual touch to seem unnerving enough already. You get a smidge of time with others that are mostly "hey, that's nice" or "sure", so there's that. The action sequences are generally satisfying in the staging that mostly keeps things fresh, as signified with having a duck boat involved to go with a few chuckles in the lingering absurdity that comes with a vacation area becoming the most evident staging area for mayhem. The ending is, well, surely a bit too familiar, mainly because it thrives on conveniences for nearly too much of its 89 minutes (the last movie also started and ended in the same place, naturally) and I'm not entirely sure this is a movie that needs a follow up to feel whole. As a whole, Nobody 2 is a casual trek through the proverbial woods of movie-shuffling, one that achieves most of what it sets out to do in vacation-based action beats. I don't really know if there is a profound desire for a third of these movies, but I can always endorse a decent time with an action movie when it seems necessary to do so, so there's that, I suppose.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Arguably, you have stuff happen to people in action movies that would fit right in for horror movies, such as say, a dart to the eye.

Baby Geniuses.

Review #2149: Baby Geniuses. 

Cast: 

Kathleen Turner (Dr. Elena Kinder), Christopher Lloyd (Dr. Heep), Peter MacNicol (Dan Bobbins), Kim Cattrall (Robin Bobbins), Dom DeLuise (Lenny), Ruby Dee (Margo), with Leo, Gerry and Myles Fitzgerald (Sylvester "Sly" & Whit; voices by Miko Hughes), and Kyle Howard (Dickie/Ice Pick) Directed by Bob Clark (#020 - A Christmas Story, #679 - Black Christmas, #1055 - Porky's, #1854 - My Summer Story)

Review: 

"We wanted to go for a more realistic presentation of the concept." - Bob Clark.

Oh no, Bob Clark. This was the guy who did horror such as Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things (1972) and Black Christmas (1974) before getting to do comedy/dramas such as Tribute (1980). After that, every film of his seems to remind one of a rollercoaster, as for every sleeper-turned-classic such as A Christmas Story (1983)...there was a litany of films that went down the road of audience appreciation such as the following: Porky's (1981 - hit, for better or worse), Porky's II: The Next Day (1983 - hit, somewhat), Rhinestone (1984 - the odd flop), Turk 182 (1985 - flop), From the Hip (1987 - flop), Loose Cannons (1990 - flopped harder), My Summer Story (1994 - little-seen flop), I'll Remember April (1999 - ???)...and then this. The involvement of Bob Clark with what became this film started in 1994. Clark ran into Jon Voight when attending a play and heard about a script that Voight wanted to do with his company that he had formed with Steven Paul in Crystal Sky Productions; Paul came up with the initial concept because he saw two babies communicating to each other once. This script (with multiple writers having gone through it) involved babies. While the script didn't look great to Clark (it involved portals called "Baby World"), he was interested in the short film he was shown involving babies sitting around in a meeting like they were executives (i.e., morph technology). Clark led the charge for a shift in the script that honed to the corporate angle because the other script seemed less "fresh." Of course, Clark had every reason to be nervous with the effects, but Babe (1995) certainly cooled fears a bit when it came to morphing. The effects when it came to the babies fell to the hands of Creative Special Effects when it comes to lips and mouths (alongside other stuff like natural head movements) for the babies for, well, conversation. By default, the CGI is a pioneer of some sort when it came to mouth movement, with credit of course going to babies...hitting their marks along with the use of a 15-year-old little person and a young gymnast for dancing and karate moves. Would you be surprised to hear that the film had a dubious release history? It was first planned for a release in Christmas of 1997 before incomplete effects meant a new target of 1998 and then 1999, and there was even the possibility of just shuttering the film as a Columbia TriStar Home Video release in the direct-to circuit before the movie slithered onto theaters in March of 1999, which managed to garner marginal attention from audiences. Five years later, Clark returned to direct a sequel with Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2 (2004), now with Voight serving as a star to go with Paul writing the screenplay and serving as a producer. Somehow, that film has a much worse reputation than this film, and it happened to be the last film directed by Clark, who died in 2007 at the age of 67.

Getting kids (age 5-9, apparently) rather than adult voices to voice the babies (such as say, Look Who's Talking [1989]) is probably the least sad thing of the whole thing. What could possibly invite you to waste 95 minutes on a movie that never succeeds in every joke that is attempted? If there was a God, I do not believe that watching babies walk and talk would be high on the priority list. You might as well call it the film most likely to be thought of as having no soul in it. The people who made this film probably did not think much of the film either during or after production, but that doesn't give an excuse for this being one of the worst things I have ever seen. Hell, it shouldn't even be called a film, it should be put in a special garbage can that you would put expired food products in. You might think, oh, well, Monster a Go-Go (1965) is filled with more inconsistencies and worse acting. Well, maybe, but that has the label of being made in weirder circumstances of "make the best out of the footage", what kind of excuse does this Hollywood slop have? Absolutely none. Clark and his team probably thought it was one of those things you can put on for the kids and enjoy, but no, they did not. I can't tell who to feel sorrier for when it comes to being present in such a bad feature here, Lloyd (future voice in Foodfight!) or DeLuise (guy who appeared in past junk such as Sextette, and The Magic Voyage dub); Lloyd's most dubious scene might as well be his second one, when he accesses a computer that only is there to deliver exposition to the audience and serve no other purpose. Well, okay, maybe Turner, because she has more time than each actor and doesn't even get to chew scenery. Imagine my shock, no scene chewing in a movie that has less life on it than the planet Mars. Even if you want to term MacNicol and Cattrall as just sleepwalking through their roles, why should they be given slack? It's easy to say folks are mailing it in, but, well, yea, they are mailing it in as if this was a direct-to-video production, complete with little motivation to do much of anything. They repeat one line four times in quick succession and later do a repeat of a gag where an adult gets tricked into getting hit in the beans after talking about it. The voices coming out of those babies were never going to work with how it looked because it just isn't a useful effect that you would want to see for very long. It is a gag that has run amok for what might as well count for anti-comedy. Truly, this was a sad experience to sit through, because it means that Bob Clark may be one of few people who directed both a vaunted classic and a horrendously awful feature in the same career. Avoid, unless you like garbage.

Overall, I give it 0 out of 10 stars.

Next: The Lonely Lady.

Redux: Who Framed Roger Rabbit.

Redux #352: Who Framed Roger Rabbit.

Cast: 

Bob Hoskins (Eddie Valiant), Christopher Lloyd (Judge Doom), Charles Fleischer (Roger Rabbit, Benny the Cab, Greasy and Psycho), Stubby Kaye (Marvin Acme), Joanna Cassidy (Dolores), Kathleen Turner (Jessica Rabbit), Alan Tilvern (R.K. Maroon), Lou Hirsch (Baby Herman), David L. Lander (Smart Ass), Fred Newman (Stupid), June Foray (Wheezy and Lena Hyena), Mel Blanc (Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Porky Pig, Tweety Bird, and Sylvester), Joe Alaskey (Yosemite Sam), and Wayne Allwine (Mickey Mouse) Directed by Robert Zemeckis (#317 - The Polar Express)

Review: 

On June 22, 1988, Who Framed Roger Rabbit was released in theaters. It was a solid movie that marked a new high point in integrating animation and live action in cinema. There had been a handful of films that had animation within a primary live-action setting, such as with Song of the South (1946) and Mary Poppins (1964). But this was something quite special, from its director in Robert Zemeckis all the way down to a lead actor that had to spend several scenes having to act again thin air. A graduate of USC Film School, Zemeckis had directed four films before this one: I Wanna Hold Your Hand (1978) and Used Cars (1980), Romancing the Stone (1984), and Back to the Future (1985). The success of Stone had been preceded by two audience flops (both of which were produced by Steven Spielberg), but even before then he had an interest in directing a project that was to adapt the novel Who Censored Roger Rabbit?, originally published in 1981 by Gary K. Wolf. Shortly after publication, Walt Disney Productions (as headlined by Ron W. Miller at the time) bought the film rights to the mystery fantasy novel in an attempt to make a blockbuster production. You may remember that this is the period where Disney tried to branch to more interesting work beyond what they had done in live action, which namely involved films such as Tron (1982) to go with a small collection of animated features. Jeffrey Price and Peter S. Seaman wrote a number of drafts that eventually became a screenplay that did away with the original setting that involved comic strip characters (and a darker ending) for an alternative 1947 Hollywood with Golden Age animation characters. Disney tried to make to test footage with Darrell Van Citters as animation director (and Paul Reubens as voice for the title character). However, by 1985, Disney (who ousted Miller, champion of the project) decided to partner with Amblin Entertainment (headlined by Spielberg), which was a deal that would see a budget just under $30 million (after a projection of it being for $50 million) and complete creative control for Zemeckis and Spielberg...and the former decided to pick who he called the best animator in the world to do the film: Richard Williams. The son of an illustrator and painter, Williams was inspired by a childhood showing of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) to become an animator, and by the time he was a student at the Ontario College of Art he already was a commercial artist. He did a variety of short films and segments after the success of The Little Island (1958), with his work on the short film A Christmas Carol (1971) garnering him his first Academy Award. He did not like the idea of moving to the States to work on the film with the Disney bureaucracy, so they shifted production to London (they also made a deal to help him finish a film he had been making on-and-off since 1964 with The Thief and the Cobbler, but that is its own can of worms); his intent of breaking the animation rules (for which one stressed to not move the camera, which Williams felt was animators just being lazy) was helped with Industrial Light and Magic, who dealt with optical composition  as explained by the supervisor for the film in Ed Jones here (if one wants to hear a perspective within animators, click here). At any rate, with a budget that ballooned to over $50 million, the film (released under the Touchstone Pictures label, which had been created by Miller) was a major success in its time, garnering four Academy Awards that dealt with editing (Arthur Schmidt), sound effects editing, visual effects (Ken Ralston, Williams, Edward Jones, and George Gibbs), and a special achievement award for Williams.

As explained by associate producer Don Hahn years later, Zemeckis had an intent to do animation with live action in a "very contemporary way", which mainly involved a camera that would move to go in a moody film noir. There would be various methods used to help with making sure the live actors (Hoskins, mostly) would interact with something that could be transferred to making it look like he is at eye level with the toons (there were also a few sequences with blue screen, which can be seen in a certain home Blu-ray release as a special feature), such as: mime artistry, puppeteering, and robotic arms. Charles Fleischer dressed up in a rabbit costume and acted as a stand-in behind camera for a wide variety of scenes. As a whole, it is a hodgepodge movie that is one part cornucopia of cartoon characters from the past such as Betty Boop or Yosemite Sam, one part film noir and also one part comedy. What a wonderful film to view through the lens of interaction, one that is consistently on edge to either play noir or comedy without breaking out one false note in its 104-minute runtime. Oh sure, the scenes and bits spent with the toon characters are a delight (because they aren't mere cameos for the sake of being there), but it is the performance of Hoskins (who had plenty of theater experience before doing film) in versatility that makes the whole magic act work as well as it does. Imagine having to act in a film where you have to do mime training to go along with having to interact with characters that aren't really there on set beyond a stand-in. As such, he excels at interaction on eye level and in his timing when it comes to both noir and as straight man when paired with Fleischer (remember, he was in a bunny suit on the side), who makes for a quality comedic presence in blustering clownishness with rapid-fire pace. Turner was actually not credited for her role in the film (nor was Amy Irving for the introductory song), which she described as one where "the whole body is the breath". It certainly is a relaxed way of doing a sultry-but-moral noir player. Lloyd is perfectly stiff as one would hope from such an imposing figure that makes the resulting climax all the more interesting within its payoff (who better to turn a place of cartoon mayhem into one of business mayhem than a judge?). The other live action players do well within the detective story reaches that mainly involve a strait-laced Cassidy or oddballs in Kaye and Tilvern. The Ink & Paint Club probably represents the best opportunity to show just how far one could go in devastating brilliance of the link in animation and live action for quality enjoyment that keeps your attention in humorous elegance. The build-up to actually reaching Toontown makes for quite a quality payoff when one gets to see a sequence of Bugs Bunny and Mickey Mouse on the same screen (with the same amount of time together, per agreement), which is particularly special because it still remains the only time the two have been in the same screen (this was the last appearance of Bugs Bunny as voiced by Blanc in a feature before his death in 1989). It isn't a movie just about seeing what character shows up, of course, because the main point of the film is to show just how much fun one can have in the art of blending animation and potboiler adventure that is neat in its manic execution. As a whole, Who Framed Roger Rabbit is a treat to watch from start to finish, one that benefits from a wonderful performance from Hoskins and the contributions of Zemeckis, Williams and company to deliver a highly watchable movie in all of the right ways that stands the test of time.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Foodfight!

Review #1766: Foodfight!

Cast: 

Charlie Sheen (Dex Dogtective), Wayne Brady (Daredevil Dan), Hilary Duff (Sunshine Goodness), Eva Longoria (Lady X / Priscilla), Larry Miller (Vlad Chocool), Christopher Lloyd (Mr. Clipboard), Robert Costanzo (Maximillus Moose), Chris Kattan (Polar Penguin), Ed Asner (Mr. Leonard), Jerry Stiller (General X), Christine Baranski (Hedda Shopper), Lawrence Kasanoff (Cheasel T. Weasel), Harvey Fierstein (Fat Cat Burglar), Cloris Leachman (Brand X Lunch Lady), Haylie Duff (Sweetcakes), Shelley Morrison (Lola Fruitola), and Edie McClurg (Mrs. Butterworth) Directed by Lawrence Kasanoff.

Review:

“We’ve got the movie, we’ve got the property, the place, the equipment, the talent, we’re there. Do we believe our next movie, Foodfight! is going to be a huge hit? Of course we do!”

Why don't we just do a whole review of short sentences that will sum up this film's sad history? I'll start: In development for a decade. Managed to lose the hard drive of assets that resulted in a restart. Directed by a guy who produced movies like Mortal Kombat while responsible for a Live Tour edition...with no other directing projects since. Managed to be sold off by debt collectors for at least $2.5 million after being made for roughly $45-60 million. Released in a theater for exactly one week in the United Kingdom, while everyone else "received" it on DVD or video-on-demand. Meant to aim for a cartoonish animation like the Looney Tunes shorts but ended up requiring motion capture animation (you thought The Polar Express was odd? Try this for ten minutes). A hodgepodge attempt at making a studio like Pixar with a cross between Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (1988) and Toy Story (1995). Kasanoff planned a variety of media to tie-in with the film, including an ice show. Made by a director who was described by his crew as "idiosyncratic" that thought animation is the only part of film production where quality is on the rise while costs are going down. Filled with an assortment of brand names for supporting characters. Manages to have worse (unfinished) animation than Hoodwinked! (2005). Made by Threshold Entertainment, whose next animation venture was Bobbleheads: The Movie (2020). Written by Sean Catherine Derek, Lawrence Kasanoff, Brent Friedman, Rebecca Swanson with a story by Joshua Wexler & Kasanoff (who also co-produced the movie).

Inept. Irritating. Incoherent. Inconceivable. Trainwreck. Embarrassment. Need I go on with one-word sentences? How much can one really say about this movie? The very idea of brand names as lead characters for a film is cynically embarrassing on its own, but the very fact that this is the most embarrassing animated film I have ever seen is the saddest thing about the whole experience. 91 minutes of pain, pure and simple. You can laugh at the animation, true. To an extent, you can also laugh at the inexplicable innuendo and crass attempts at humor presented here. But one just seems downright sad at recognizing the various voices present to be in such a travesty. Sheen being here isn't exactly a surprise, because I can equally believe he would stoop to something for a paycheck regardless if it was the mid 2000s or 2012, mostly because one has to breeze a middling collection of cliches and not clap their hands in anticipation. Brady is obviously better to view on television, as I think anybody who is familiar with the medium will tell you, because heaven help the next person to say that cartoon sidekicks are the best thing ever. Duff doesn't even have to try when she spends half of her time off screen, so there is that. There are no winners in the cast, but at least Longoria seems to have a go at playing sultry and adversary in the same length. The less said about Miller, the better. Lloyd obviously likes to keep busy with roles (because this was the same year as The Oogieloves movie), and since he only has a handful of lines to go with a character that is jerkily animated, it sure makes an amusing sight more than a performance. Pairing Kattan and Sheen for a gag is probably better than eating year-old brand cereal. Asner (rest in peace) has less lines than one would expect, because clearly more time needed to be on the market and not the bare attempts at whatever "Brand X" is supposed to do with "Marketopolis". Kasanoff playing a weasel is a sentence that writes itself. As a whole, you don't need 1,000 words to say that the movie has no fundamental story worth investing in, because you can also look at the movie and hear its crass jokes and puns that confirm what a colossal waste one could have here. This is one of the worst films made with a substantial budget and likely one of the all-time worst animated films ever made. Might be good if you take certain substances or if you want to know what not finishing all of your work looks like.

Overall, I give it 0 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Once more, because everyone deserves an eighth piece of awfulness. Fateful Findings.

Incidentally, if you ever find this review, check out this video someone made about the making of Foodfight! that provides more insight: ROTTEN: Behind the Foodfight

Nobody (2021).

Review #1673: Nobody.

Cast: 

Bob Odenkirk (Hutch "Nobody" Mansell), Connie Nielsen (Rebecca Mansell), Aleksei Serebryakov (Yulian Kuznetsov), RZA (Harry Mansell), Christopher Lloyd (David Mansell), Gage Munroe (Brady Mansell), Paisley Cadorath (Sammy Mansell), Michael Ironside (Eddie Williams), Billy MacLellan (Charlie Williams), Colin Salmon (The Barber), Araya Mengesha (Pavel), and Aleksandr Pal (Teddy Kuznetsov) Directed by Ilya Naishuller.

Review: 

To me, this film really did come out of nowhere. True, in a normal-ish year, this might have been somewhere carefully placed on the radar, but one can only have so many interests when priorities shift. But research comes in handy when one wonders if they have seen something like this before. The film was written by Derek Kolstad, who you may remember as the writer behind the scripts for the John Wick series, and the director behind the first film in David Leitch is one of the producers for this film. This is the second film by Naishuller (released six years after Hardcore Henry), a Russian-born director known for his work within music with his rock band Biting Elbows (his influences perhaps fit in ranging wildly, citing the James Bond series alongside Wes Anderson). To put it in perspective, this is the first action role for Odenkirk, who has dabbled in comedy and drama with Mr. Show and Better Call Saul, and the latter show relates that argument since Odenkirk felt that on that show he was basically playing an action character but without fighting. Odenkirk came up with the initial idea, inspired by a home invasion that he had experienced and had to deal with personally (complete with a police officer talking about what he would have done if it was his family), and he underwent two years of learning with the choreography in action. The idea of someone deciding to re-inject some adventure in their life isn't particularly a new one, but it is the way that Naishuller maneuvers the film in its action and warmth that makes for a charmer, particularly one that at its heart is a family tale (of course he describes it as an "addiction drama about a man whose addiction is violence", which is also apt). 

One can approach the film from two perspectives, one of them being the idea of awakening oneself into action after dormancy that can hone for any folks struggling in retirement, where finding a new outlet can be a tough one...and then of course there is the perspective of someone who was powerless in a situation with home, where the "should have done X" question definitely can play tricks on your mind (this works also for sports, if you consider how many people believe they could do a certain sport like the folks they see on TV). Consider the bus sequence in the film, because it serves as a hallmark for what comes before and after: it balances its levels of violence within an injection of levity that helps to deliver a riveting time that doesn't end up jamming the senses (i.e. one can appreciate the action without experience a jarring sensation). All of these sentences can be distilled into one: I really enjoyed this movie. It all starts with Odenkirk, because one needs a good presence within calm family man and tense action timing. He excels in that regard, because there is never a moment that one seems to think of him as out of his range, taking the material with relative patience that is engaging without seeming like a pastiche of other action stars - motivation and composure go a long way towards a fun movie that never borders on parody or cartoon of things one has seen before. Nielsen accompanies the proceedings with calm patience, fitting alongside Odenkirk with calm care that keeps the family angle in relative focus (sure, there are two kids to go alongside that, but one isn't thinking too much about that). Serebryakov makes for a quality adversary, wrapped with some menacing quality without seeming generic, managing to make a curious presence count with terror (whether involving weary greed or a bout of live performances). Ah, but the real surprise is to see RZA and Lloyd come together to share time with Odenkirk, which likely makes for one of the more interesting family action films to come around in time (admittedly the bar can be low if you've seen something like A Good Day to Die Hard (2013), for example). I was curious to see how much they would show up in this film, but their presence proves quite necessary in enjoyment, gunning their way through in a manner that inspires curiosity for further adventure (which is easier to say if one is more familiar with either actor, I suppose). As a whole, it runs efficiently at 92 minutes that makes an interesting action flick that has its share of laughs that has fun within a degree of absurdity that Odenkirk uses for great effect in becoming a capable action lead through and through. It might not be the most original work to come through the action genre, but it surely delivers enough to make it all worthwhile with no sense of gimmickry or monotony detected here. However many movies Odenkirk makes in the action genre, one will not forget his first, a winner for both director and star and a well-suited curiosity for the spring.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Eight Men Out.

Review #1287: Eight Men Out.

Cast: 
John Cusack (Buck Weaver), Clifton James (Charles Comiskey), Michael Lerner (Arnold Rothstein), Christopher Lloyd (Bill Burns), John Mahoney (Kid Gleason), Charlie Sheen (Happy Felsch), David Strathairn (Eddie Cicotte), D. B. Sweeney (Shoeless Joe Jackson), Michael Rooker (Chick Gandil), Don Harvey (Swede Risberg), and James Read (Lefty Williams) Written and Directed by John Sayles.

Review: 
Yes I know, not a horror film. However, today is the start of the World Series, which incidentally features my Houston Astros, so how could I resist covering a baseball movie? This one had been on my list for quite a while, so it only makes sense to do it now. Enjoy, and let's hope for a wonderful World Series result.

It is interesting to note the passing of 100 years since the Black Sox scandal, in which eight players of the Chicago White Sox were accused of throwing games in the 1919 World Series in conspiracy with gamblers. A public trial ensued in 1921, for which none of the accused players were convicted of any crime, although they were banned from playing professional baseball for the rest of their lives. A tale as old as time for baseball (a sport I adore) undeniably has inspired writers to adapt it into stories. Eliot Asinof wrote an account of the scandal in 1963, while W. P. Kinsella's wrote a magic realist novel with Shoeless Joe (1982, which was adapted into Field of Dreams the same year as this film). It isn't hard to say that baseball fans will certainly have interest in seeing this tale come to life in film while non-baseball fans will have a little harder time getting behind what this movie wants to show with this (questionably accurate) period drama. When it comes to baseball movies, this is probably safe middle ground stuff, doing just fine with its look and some of its ensemble moments while being a bit lacking when it comes to making everything really stick (particularly when it comes to some egregious liberties taken with real events, which is just as true with the novel and its combination of fictional characters into what is meant to be a non-fiction narrative). It clocks in at just a few seconds under two hours, for which the first half proves more favorable than the latter half (what better way to combine baseball cliches than courtroom cliches), seeming to have a few amusing moments with its cast. As such, the highlights include Cusack, Strathairn, Sweeney, and Rooker, with each actor of the conspiracy sticking out, such as Cusack and his bright disposition (even when faced with a bunch of crooked teammates), or the calmness of the others in their belief of that allure one calls more money. Minor highlights include James and Mahoney, making crucial points count just fine. How much guff can one give about accuracy about adapting the scandal to film with source material that took its own liberties with the facts (the Internet sure does help occasionally when it comes to finding tidbits of information, such as Society for American Baseball Research (SABR), who recently had made an article detailing numerous myths about the scandal, such as the White Sox actually having a high payroll (for 1919), or the gamblers being approached by the players (as opposed to the other way around), or the grand jury testimony being stolen (which they simply re-created later on anyway, which didn't have a big effect on the trial). If you really wanted to go further, the Internet is your friend for finding things to pick at (for better or worse). For me, it does tend to rankle me, in part because a film should know a little better about getting more than basic concepts right, especially stuff like Christy Mathewson (famed baseball legend) being the one that helped out the journalist investigation as opposed to Lardner (played by Sayles himself). In the end, I find that the film does best when letting the players speak for themselves along with its baseball action, with its foundation having quite a few cracks that can make this a hit-or-miss kind of movie. For me, it is a fair single, worth a look if one is curious enough for an old-timey but fair-minded day at an old ballpark.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.

Review #1164: One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.

Cast: 
Jack Nicholson (Randle McMurphy), Louise Fletcher (Nurse Ratched), Will Sampson ("Chief" Bromden), William Redfield (Dale Harding), Brad Dourif (Billy Bibbit), Sydney Lassick (Charlie Cheswick), Christopher Lloyd (Max Taber), Danny DeVito (Martini), Dean Brooks (Dr. John Spivey), William Duell (Jim Sefelt), Vincent Schiavelli (Bruce Frederickson), Michael Berryman (Ellis), Nathan George (Attendant Washington), Marya Small (Candy), and Scatman Crothers (Orderly Turkle) Directed by Miloš Forman.

Review: 
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest was originally a novel by Ken Kesey that he had done based off his time working as an orderly in a mental healthy facility, for which he wrote the novel in 1959 before it was published in 1962. In the original novel, the story was narrated through the character named Chief Bromden, who found that society was controlled by some sort of system called "The Combine". A year after the novel was released, the novel was turned into a play, written by Dale Wasserman that had McMurphy played by Kirk Douglas, who had bought the rights to make it for the stage or for film. After a decade of trying to make it into a film, he gave the rights to his son Michael, who helped co-produce the film along with Saul Zaentz, with Lawrence Hauben and Bo Goldman doing the screenplay. The film was primarily filmed at Oregon State Hospital in Salem. Kesey was not happy with how the film adaptation came out, later suing Douglas and Zaentz for a percentage of the gross and damages for “breaking our verbal agreement and ruining the book.” He objected to the fact that the film was from the perspective of McMurphy rather than the Chief, describing it as such: "they took out the morality; they took out the Combine—the conspiracy that is America.”

At any rate, it isn't hard to see why the film is fairly enjoyable, having a certain kind of energy and pull with a fine deal of craftsmanship and interesting people to follow along with. Nicholson and his rebellious presence give a great magnetic pull for the film, bemused at having to deal with the state of the people on both sides of this mental institution that he deals with, while also having a bit of humor and will to him that makes for good entertainment. Fletcher plays her insidious role with a good degree of understated manipulation, having no sense of overblown nature nor being overshadowed by the other members of the cast, having a voice and enough presence to make this battle of wills work without too many hitches. One good scene with Nicholson and Fletcher that I can highlight is the scene where his character tries to get the television to be turned onto the World Series, where he tries to get the necessary amount of votes from the submissive ones in the ward and her attempts to assert her authority, complete with an ensuing (and amusing) act of defiance - imagining the game out loud. Sampson, who had been discovered by the producers due to his 6'7 frame, does a fine job for his acting debut, doing just alright with the small amount of lines he has while playing his part in the climax without any hitches. Dourif and Lloyd (who both had done work on the stage prior to this film) shine in their own ways, with the former's fear and willingness to try and please everyone coming out fairly well and the latter being amusing when picking on Redfield. Lassick does well with conveying panic and nervousness, and DeVito (reprising his role from the 1971 revival of the play) also does fine with brief moments to talk.

The film does take some time to show the conformity and mindless automation of the people in the ward, and for the most part the film keeps itself consistent. The fishing sequence is a bit of a miss when compared to other sequences in part because it just feels a bit too silly that kind of messes with the rest of the film's tone. It should be mentioned that the fishing sequence was present in the novel, although it has a few significant differences - such as the fact that the trip is planned in the book, for example. In any case, it's a bit of a understatement to say that the film turned out to be such a great success, being a hit with audiences while winning numerous awards, winning what is described as the Big Five categories of the Academy Awards: Best Picture (beating films such as Jaws and Nashville), Best Director, Best Actor, Best Actress, and Best Adapted Screenplay. On the whole, the film is pretty entertaining, having an enduring spirit to it that makes it work more often than not in its 133 minute run-time. It still manages to hold up well after over forty years since its release with a game cast and an enduring spirit that makes for at least one watch.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension.

Review #776: The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension.

Cast
Peter Weller (Buckaroo Banzai), John Lithgow (Lord John Whorfin / Dr. Emilio Lizardo), Ellen Barkin (Penny Priddy), Jeff Goldblum (New Jersey/Dr. Sidney Zweibel), Christopher Lloyd (John Bigboote), Lewis Smith (Perfect Tommy), Rosalind Cash (John Emdall), Clancy Brown (Rawhide), Robert Ito (Professor Hikita), Pepe Serna (Reno Nevada), Ronald Lacey (President Widmark), Matt Clark (Secretary of Defense), William Traylor (General Catburd), Carl Lumbly (John Parker), Dan Hedaya (John Gomez), and Vincent Schiavelli (John O'Connor) Directed by W. D. Richter.

Review

Here's what we can all agree is a "cult film". Buckaroo Banzai certainly have a mind of its own when it comes to being as offbeat and ambitious as possible. It has been described as a "science fiction romantic adventure comedy film", which is one heck of an classification, and it makes sense. Our main character is a scientist/neurosurgeon/rock musician/race car driver, complete with a bunch of assistants called the The Hong Kong Cavaliers. It's not an origin story as much as it feels like the middle of a much larger tale, especially with regards to our multi-talented lead. Weller excels as Banzai, mainly because of how he projects the hero, not being just an action hero, but also a smart quirky aspect to a quirky row of characters. Lithgow hams it up as well as anyone would when named "Lizardo", especially with that wig and teeth. The Cavaliers (Brown, Serna, Smith, Goldblum, Vera) and Lloyd (especially that makeup) are also pretty entertaining to watch as well. Weller and Barkin certainly have some entertaining chemistry together. The movie is certainly offbeat enough to work, although it is a shame that the movie did not succeed financially. It certainly has enough charm and fun in it. The effects still look pretty good for 1984, especially with the Lectroids, who look right for a movie as offbeat as this. The movie ends (naturally) with our heroes walking off together (with a killer end credits theme), announcing plans for a sequel that (so far) has never been made entitled Buckaroo Banzai Against the World Crime League. Ultimately, this is a movie that does what it feels makes sense, without regards to trying to being simple in any regard that you have to see for yourself.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Back to the Future Part III.

Review #748: Back to the Future Part III.

Cast
Michael J. Fox (Marty McFly and Seamus McFly), Christopher Lloyd (Doc Brown), Mary Steenburgen (Clara Clayton), Thomas F. Wilson (Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen and Biff Tannen), Lea Thompson (Maggie McFly and Lorraine Baines-McFly), James Tolkan (Marshal James Strickland), Elisabeth Shue (Jennifer Parker), Matt Clark (Chester the Bartender), Richard Dysart (Barbwire Salesman), Pat Buttram (Saloon Old-Timer), Harry Carey Jr. (Saloon Old-Timer), and Dub Taylor (Saloon Old-Timer) Directed by Robert Zemeckis (#317 - The Polar Express, #352 - Who Framed Roger Rabbit, #581 - Forrest Gump, #648 - Beowulf, #701 - Back to the Future, and #747 - Back to the Future Part II)

Review
The third (and final) part of this trilogy is regarded by some to be the weaker of the three movies, though it is kind of hard to keep the same magic for three movies over a five year span without having some sort of familiarity. Parts II and III were filmed back to back, released one year apart. To be honest, I can't really find much to hate, mainly because this is a trilogy that is easy to appreciate. The cast once again does a fine job. Steenburgen (the only new main person) does a fine job, especially with Lloyd. They actually have some good chemistry together, especially when talking about Jules Verne. The scene with them dancing is also pretty fun to watch, especially considering the music in the background is by ZZ Top, who are certainly Sharp Dressed Men (rimshot). Wilson once again manages to play a pretty good bully, though this one actually has a weapon for once. Fox and Lloyd are good once again, especially when trying to find way to get the DeLorean to actually get to 88mph...like giving the car alcohol.

The Old West is certainly an interesting setting, and the sets do look really well done, especially the town festival scenes and the saloon. The movie isn't as funny as the last two, but at least it makes up for it by being as entertaining and as good-looking. It also is a satisfying way to end the trilogy, all capped off with a time travelling train. How did it get there? I'm not sure, but I'm not complaining that much. Overall, this is an great trilogy that is entertaining and enjoyable, from beginning to end. While the first film is the best, they are all enjoyable in their own way. If you haven't seen them, go see them.

Countdown to #750: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2...

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Back to the Future Part II.

Review #747: Back to the Future Part II.

Cast
Michael J. Fox (Marty McFly, Marty Jr, and Marlene McFly), Christopher Lloyd (Doc Brown), Thomas F. Wilson (Biff Tannen and Griff Tannen), Lea Thompson (Lorraine Baines-McFly), Elisabeth Shue (Jennifer Parker), James Tolkan (Mr. Strickland), Jeffrey Weissman (George McFly), and Flea (Needles) Directed by Robert Zemeckis (#317 - The Polar Express, #352 - Who Framed Roger Rabbit, #581 - Forrest Gump, #648 - Beowulf, and #701 - Back to the Future)

Review
Ah yes, October 21, 2015. The FUTURE. Welp, not now anyway, because today is actually the day that the DeLorean time machine arrived (with Doc, Marty and Jennifer) at the beginning of this film, so I figured that it would be appropriate to review this today, what with our hoverboards and our self lacing shoes...and Jaws 19. Let's recap the first movie, shall we? Or not, because I can just say it quite simply: It's a fun movie. Go see it, if you haven't already. But how is the second movie? It's enjoyable, but maybe not as much as the first one. The characters are enjoyable and about what you'd expect, though I didn't notice that Fox played Marlene McFly, mainly because of the makeup, mainly used for the 2015 scenes, which look pretty good.

Crisipin Glover is one of the two actors (with Shue replacing Wells as Jennifer) from the first film who doesn't return for the sequel, either because of pay issues or (according to him, anyway) his problems with the moral of the story (specifically his belief that the money is the reward that leads to happiness), but he would technically be in it, due to footage from the first film being used and Weissman (in prosthetics) playing him, which led to a lawsuit.

Fox and Lloyd shine again, especially when Doc is explaining the new alternate timeline. It's a bit strange to see Marty try to sneak a Sports Almanac from the future to try and make some money back in 1985, especially considering him and his family are already doing pretty well, what with the new truck for Marty and all at the end of the first film. But to be fair, at least Marty learns a lesson by the end of the film (mainly to make sure that when you get rid of something, you really get rid of it thoroughly). The gag of him dropping everything when someone calls him "chicken" is a bit annoying, though it at least is addressed a bit more in the next film. Wilson still does good at being a bully, even when he's playing an aged bully...who still waxes cars. The hoverboard action in 2015 is certainly a highlight to watch, as fun as the skateboard chase in the first film. The movie certainly likes going back to the first film, and it is a little fun watching Marty try to avoid himself while getting to see events again. It's a movie that certainly works as a sequel, and while it isn't quite up to the first film, it is at least a worthy sequel...that leads itself to a sequel of its own.

Countdown to #750: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3...

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Back to the Future.

Review #701: Back to the Future.

Cast
Michael J. Fox (Marty McFly), Christopher Lloyd (Doc Brown), Lea Thompson (Lorraine Baines-McFly), Crispin Glover (George McFly), Thomas F. Wilson (Biff Tannen), Claudia Wells (Jennifer Parker), and James Tolkan (Mr. Strickland) Directed by Robert Zemeckis (#317 - The Polar Express, #352 - Who Framed Roger Rabbit, #581 - Forrest Gump, and #648 - Beowulf)

Review
Yep, Back to the Future. I told you all that this film would be reviewed sometime in the future. And low and behold, the future has arrived. Which is now the present. Or the past. Forget what I said early. Back to the Future is a movie I've watched a few times over the years, from seeing it on a projector when I was a young kid to seeing it on HBO Family (yes that actually exists) three (or so) years ago, I remember this movie vividly as I'm sure many of you do. That being said, this movie is great. Are you not surprised? It doesn't matter when I watch it, it's still a fun movie to watch, and an even better movie to talk about, especially when it comes to the characters. And the music. Fox is just so likable to watch, especially his interactions with Doc and Biff, and he gets his chance to shine alone as well, and one of my (many) favorite scenes is him playing Johnny B. Goode at the dance, solely because Fox looks so energized in that moment of euphoria.

Speaking of energy, Christopher Lloyd is just pure energy, with a load of charm along with the ability to just make words just pop into the head, especially when it comes to gigawatts, pronounced as jiggawatts. Lloyd and Fox make for a really good team because their interactions seem real and seem like the kind of thing that would happen with nearly anyone else. Biff is actually a pretty good villain in the sense that while he is not what one would call intelligent, he is still a brute force of strength that also is what he is: the bad guy that loses. But at least Wilson has his moments, especially with Glover, who is perfectly cast, as is Thompson. The soundtrack by Alan Silvestri is great to listen with its scope working well on the movie, though I must note that Huey Lewis and the News' "Back in Time" and "The Power of Love" are also beneficial to the music being so effective as a whole. This is a brilliant film that features one of my favorite things: A DeLorean. The car is so cool looking (minus the giant door opening, which could really hurt if not opened carefully), and the fact it serves as the time machine is just great, given that it already looked like a strange device. The movie is clever, fun, exciting, hilarious, wickedly cool, and just plain ol' classic. I highly recommend watching the movie more than once.

Oh yeah, the sequels. I'll get to them...in the future.

Overall, I give it 10 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Angels in the Outfield (1994).

Review #566: Angels in the Outfield (1994).

Cast
Danny Glover (George Knox), Joseph Gordon-Levitt (Roger Bomman), Christopher Lloyd (Al "The Boss" Angel), Tony Danza (Mel Clark), Ben Johnson (Hank Murphy), Brenda Fricker (Maggie Nelson), Jay O. Sanders (Ranch Wilder), Milton Davis Jr. (J.P.), Taylor Negron (David Montagne), Tony Longo (Triscuitt Messmer), Neal McDonough (Whitt Bass), Stoney Jackson (Ray Mitchell), Adrien Brody (Danny Hemmerling), Tim Conlon (Wally), and Matthew McConaughey (Ben Williams) Directed by William Dear.

Review
In honor of Opening Day, I decided to review this movie because...it was easy to find. Of all the teams that deserve to win a pennant, the Angels (Known as the California Angels in this movie, then the Anaheim Angels, now the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim. And they say sports is always logical) were probably not high up on the list (Do the word Chicago Cubs come to mind?) to win one. This is a remake of the 1951 classic, and the first big change is the focus on the kids rather then the manager of the hapless team, which I guess makes it not just a copy of the original. The movie focuses more on...depressing "child drama", which I guess makes it more 90's. But it makes it less about baseball, and more of a boring drama that probably felt sappy in the 90's, which makes you want to yell "Get on with it!", over and over. At least you get some nice shots of Angels Stadium, with the Big A sign and all.

I find it funny that this was released in 1994, the year with the infamous baseball strike (Vive Le' Expos!), and canceled the playoffs. Talking about this movie is sort of boring when baseball is in the air, real baseball (though having an Opening Series, then an Opening Night before Opening Day is sort of annoying), with real meaning. The cast are sometimes entertaining (I wish Glover would get more screen time), Levitt is effective in portraying...a kid, I suppose. It's not too hard to do that (Unless you're Jake Lloyd), and Davis Jr pairs off well with Levitt. Lloyd isn't bad, but if you blink long enough, you'll forget he's there. The baseball action isn't bad (the effects are fine for the time, as I barely noticed this was made only 20 years ago), but this is a mediocre movie that is only notable because of all the rising stars in this movie (McConaughey, Levitt, and Brody), and for being a remake. I hope you have a fun Opening Day, no matter how the team(s) you root for do tonight.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.

Review #337: Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.

Cast
William Shatner (James T. Kirk), DeForest Kelley (Leonard McCoy), James Doohan (Montgomery Scott), George Takei (Hikaru Sulu), Christopher Lloyd (Kruge), Walter Koenig (Pavel Chekov), Nichelle Nichols (Uhura), Judith Anderson (T'Lar), Robin Curtis (Saavik), Merritt Butrick (David Marcus), Mark Lenard (Sarek), John Larroquette (Maltz), Carl Stevens, Vadia Potenza, Stephen Manley, Joe W. Davis, and Leonard Nimoy (Spock) Directed by Leonard Nimoy.

Review
It has been a while since I've reviewed a Star Trek film (#299 - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan), and it was pretty good. This is (obviously) the sequel to that film, so how is it is the main question. It's...alright. The one thing that Star Trek II lacked was a battle between the villain and Kirk, so Star Trek III has one between Kirk and the villain (with Christopher Lloyd, no less). But does that help the film be a good send up? In some ways, it is. Shatner and the rest of the cast do a fine job, and while Lloyd may not match the last villain and its themes, he is enjoyable enough. The plot is reasonably balanced and the effects are good enough (especially when the Enterprise is destroyed) to leave some sort of impression. It may have some sort of weirdness, but compared to the other "weird" Star Trek film (#225 - Star Trek V: The Final Frontier), this is some good stuff with good directing done by none other than Dr. Spock (Heh). Definitely not a bad odd numbered Star Trek film.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Addams Family Values.

Review #078: Addams Family Values.

Cast
Raúl Juliá (Gomez Addams), Anjelica Huston (Mortica Addams), Christopher Lloyd (Uncle Fester), Christina Ricci (Wednesday Addams), Joan Cusack (Debbie), and Jimmy Workman (Pugsley Addams). Directed by Barry Sonnenfield (#211- Men in Black, #212 - Men in Black II)

Review
This film is a entertaining sequel to the first film, as it delivers more fun and morbid humor, but not stale and tired ones, they're different ones that help make the film be itself. Once again, the acting is superb, with Lloyd, Julia, Huston, and Ricci being the large performances. The movie has that ability to be a good sequel that doesn't rely on old jokes, or an used story-line. It's a fine little movie, in conclusion.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Addams Family.

Review #077: The Addams Family.

Cast
Raúl Juliá (Gomez Addams), Anjelica Huston (Mortica Addams), Christopher Lloyd (Uncle Fester), Christina Ricci (Wednesday Addams), Dan Heyada (Tully), Elizabeth Wilson (Abigail), and Jimmy Workman (Pugsley Addams). Directed by Barry Sonnenfield.

Review
This film is based off the classic 1960s television show of the same name, which was based on the comic strip made by Charles Addams. Anyway, this film is a charm to watch. It has good acting (With good casting), with chilling visuals and an alright plot. The film is morbid fun with a good feel to it that doesn't violate or ruin the atmosphere of the film that makes this an alright flick to watch.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.